DNA; analysis upon conviction of certain misdemeanors. (HB1264)

Introduced By

Del. David Toscano (D-Charlottesville)


Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law


DNA analysis upon conviction of certain misdemeanors. Adds misdemeanor violations of §§ 18.2-57 (assault and battery), 18.2-57.2 (assault and battery against a family or household member), 18.2-96 (petit larceny), 18.2-103 (concealing merchandise; altering price tags), 18.2-119 (trespass), 18.2-137 (destruction of property), and 18.2-460 (obstruction of justice) to the list of offenses for which an adult convicted of such offense must have a sample of his blood, saliva, or tissue taken for DNA analysis. This bill is a recommendation of the Virginia State Crime Commission. Read the Bill »


Bill Has Failed


01/10/2018Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/10/18 18103929D
01/10/2018Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
01/17/2018Impact statement from DPB (HB1264)
01/18/2018Assigned Courts sub: Subcommittee #1
01/26/2018Subcommittee recommends striking from docket (7-Y 0-N)
02/15/2018Left in Courts of Justice


ACLU-VA Police Practices, tracking this bill in Photosynthesis, notes:

The ACLU of Virginia strong opposes the expansion of the DNA data bank to include DNA from persons convicted of very minor crimes like petit larceny. We are disappointed that the Crime Commission would recommend expansion of the DNA databank while knowing that doing so can increase ethnic bias and the likelihood of false matches, among other harmful results. We continue to have serious concerns about privacy and due process with regard to mandatory DNA sampling in law enforcement, and further expanding a database that already includes the most sensitive, personal information about one in every 20 Virginians, even as the number of ‘hits’ is in decline. This is not an evidence-based decision. The Crime Commission's own staff testified before the commission that "most" people convicted of misdemeanors do not go on to commit serious felonies, and that, at best, there was an "association," and not a correlation, between convictions for the specified misdemeanors and later convictions for felonies.